Live/Work

I was listening to a bit of a round table discussion on creating new “green” jobs as part of an overall economic revitalization. A great idea, no doubt. In fact, if the government were to really put its energy behind developing alternative energy sources, we could deliver a real one-two punch: freedom from foreign oil and high-paying eco-jobs (everything from blue-collar manufacturing to white collar research and engineering).

So what’s the problem? Well, first, let’s address my point about the government. While you hear a lot of “discussion” about alternatives, the truth is current policies are modest at best and do little more than shift dollars: from oil/coal to hydrogen/corn fuels. While it’s GREAT to think about moving away from fossil fuels, these “alternative” technologies carry enormous downsides like higher food costs and CO2 emissions (for a great discussion of this issue, see “Who Killed the Electric Car“).

But before I go too far down the “what’s wrong with the government” road, let’s get back to that round table. In the discussion, one audience member posed the question:

Let’s assume we do create all these great green jobs. What’s to ensure that folks across a wide economic and racial spectrum will have access to these jobs? In other words, will these new jobs help us all, or will they benefit a select few?

Good question! While many of us want to believe we’re doing our part to save the planet and help the green movement, I think our motives and the movement require a closer examination.

To start this discussion, I’ll begin by telling a story. It’s the story of how I first discovered the modern building design and the corresponding “green” building movement.

Over a year ago I started down the path of building a home. One of the first resources I discovered was Dwell magazine. Sandwiched in between Fine Homebuilding and Fine Woodworking, Dwell seemed to offer a niche that I’d never seen before: modern design, attention to craft, and an unparalleled focus on green building. Suddenly, it seemed I found a focal point for many of the ideas rolling around in my head. I couldn’t believe so many people were interested in these exciting ideas of sustainability and good design!

Sadly, my honeymoon with Dwell was short-lived. Soon I discovered that the projects and ideas in the magazine came with a price - a steep one - that was attainable only by a select few. The beautiful bathrooms and kitchens weren’t just expensive, they were obscene. $700 faucets and $7000 sofas were the norm, and “budget” remodels were in the six figures. I soon realized that this great magazine was targeted at an audience that drove much nicer cars than mine.

In some ways, my discouragement isn’t so much with the cost of things as it is is with the expectation set up by the magazine. For instance, you’ll often read that going green adds 10-20% to the project cost. And, while that may be true in some cases, it’s more often the exception rather than the rule. Green building practices save money over the long run, but often the barrier to entry is so high that the green option never even makes it to the table.

While high price let-downs are part and parcel for Dwell and the green building movement, what worries me far more is that the conversation about building green seems focussed on an increasingly smaller circle of people. Rather than expanding to include a spectrum of economic and racially diverse audiences, the green “community” is a small demographic composed largely of urban-oriented well-to-dos.

To put it bluntly: the “green” movement runs the risk of becoming the “white” movement - a movement for white people with white collars.

Obviously I’ve chosen this term “white movement” as a bit of a pejorative. I don’t have anything personally against whites or white collar workers (Full disclosure: I’m one of ‘em). But what does worry me is that with any “moral cause” there’s a tendency to be both self effacing and insular. The more “green” one is, the more superior they become. Building a modern, green home becomes less about a social responsibility and more about a social status.

What do you think? Is the green movement truly altruistic or is growing paler by the day? And, if so, is it for better or worse?

This entry was posted Monday, February 4th, 2008 at 12:57 am and is filed under Green Building. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.